Attempting to answer the biggest offseason questions for the LA Clippers

After winning 50 games but losing in the first round, where can the Clippers go from here?

(Photo credit: Kirby Lee-Imagn Images)

No matter how their first-round series against the Denver Nuggets unfolded, the LA Clippers, by all measures, had a successful regular season.

They won 50 games and finished tied for the 3-seed in a tough Western Conference, dropping to the 5-seed thanks to tiebreakers.

But their 7-game loss at the hands of the Nuggets pushed them into an earlier offseason than they had hoped, and now it’s time to look at some of the more fascinating and important questions surrounding their potential offseason plans.

So, let’s get this puppy rolling.

---

→ WHAT’S THE CURRENT SITUATION?

As things presently stand, the Clippers are looking at 13 players under contract, at least in some form, for next season: Kawhi Leonard, James Harden, Norman Powell, Bogdan Bogdanovic, Ivica Zubac, Derrick Jones Jr., Kris Dunn, Drew Eubanks, Nicolas Batum, Kobe Brown, Cam Christie, Jordan Miller, and whoever they select with the 30th overall choice in June 25th’s NBA Draft.

Those 13 players—well, 12 plus the draft pick—account for $175.6 million. That puts the Clippers roughly $20.9 million over the salary cap but $12.3 million u͟n͟d͟e͟r͟ the luxury tax. As a result, the Clippers would still have access to the $14,104,000 non-taxpayer mid-level exception since they ended the 2024-25 fiscal year under the luxury tax to begin resetting the repeater tax penalties that they were subjected to in the previous few seasons.

They also have access to three TPEs (Traded Player Exceptions). The largest one ($6,539,000) was a result of trading P.J. Tucker near this past trade deadline and expires on Feb. 1, 2026. They also have a $4,158,440 one that expires on Feb. 6, 2026, and the third one is worth $2,087,519, which, like the one they got by dealing Tucker, expires on Feb. 1, 2026. It should be noted that TPEs rarely get used in the NBA, especially ones of such minimal financial value as these are. You can’t combine them to get a player with a larger salary; thus, in the case of their largest available TPE, they can only acquire a player making $6,539,000 or less, and so on and so forth with the remaining amounts available.

Ultimately, the Clippers are going to have pathways to add to the roster thanks to that non-taxpayer mid-level exception. They can use it all on one player, they can split it up amongst a couple of players, they can use some of it on one player and then save the rest to secure someone on the buyout market next February, and they can even use it to acquire a player via trade.

Financially, the Clippers are in a good spot. And it’s a much more palatable spot for them than it was perhaps this time last year. There’s a lot more clarity, that’s for certain.

They have one (1) notable contract on the books beyond the 2026-27 season, and that’s center Ivica Zubac, who is owed $20,998,320 in 2027-28.

Speaking of the 2026-27 campaign, as things stand, they’re looking at $111.5 million on the books in terms of salary in the form of Kawhi Leonard, Bogdan Bogdanovic, Ivica Zubac, Derrick Jones Jr., Kris Dunn, Kobe Brown, Cam Christie, and Jordan Miller. Two of those players—Bogdanovic and Brown—have team options for that season, while Dunn and Miller have non-guaranteed contracts. Leonard, Zubac, Jones, and Christie have guaranteed deals. The projected salary cap, and we are a bit of a way away from this being set in stone, is $170.1 million for that season, so the Clippers could have roughly $60 million in cap space going into that offseason that they’d be able to use to fill out the rest of the roster. It could rise to roughly $90 million by declining team options and not guaranteeing the remaining non-guaranteed contracts. But that’s a (somewhat) down-the-road topic.

So, there you have it. That’s the current situation.

(Photo credit: Matthew Hinton-Imagn Images)

→ DO THE CLIPPERS JUST RUN IT BACK?

In simple terms, yes.

In not-so-simple terms, yes … kind of?